Zadekpedia

Ask BobAsk a question of every episode, 2009–2023 — answers cite the minute

Immigration

7 min read

Part of Immigration.

Start here

Every episode (17)

Who argued it

Alex Nowrasteh ×7 · Edward Conard ×2 · Frank Buckley ×2 · Benjamin Powell · Daniel Di Martino · Ilya Somin · Joe Mathews · Mitch Jeserich · Jayant Bhandari

Welfare State · Economics · Labor Markets · Economic Growth · Constitutional Law · Open Borders · Public Policy · Assimilation

Background

Overview

Bob Zadek opened a 2011 episode by calling illegal immigration a topic that “transcends typical Democrat-Republican, liberal-conservative lines,” and said he could not discern a clear libertarian position on it either. His own view, he said, could be summed up in four words: “let them all in.” He favored as open a border as possible, provided there was some basic system to weed out people carrying disease or with very serious records. He framed the central question as whether opponents of illegal immigration oppose the “illegal” part or the “immigrant” part of the phrase Immigration Reform Is Broken (2011).

By 2021 Zadek described his position as modified: instead of “let them all in,” he said he now favored letting in as many people as possible “without suffering measurable, direct adverse consequences” Daniel Di Martino on Immigration (2021).

The broken system and the DREAM Act

Guest Sophia Campos, an undocumented college student who said she had been in the United States since age six, told Zadek that many people hold extreme emotions about immigration “without really knowing the facts.” She said the immigration system is broken and that there is no single line people can enter to become permanent legal residents. She said there is no legal pathway for her to gain legal residency, and that this is why the DREAM Act and immigration reform are important. She cited 12 million undocumented people in the country and said they cannot all be deported Immigration Reform Is Broken (2011).

Campos also said undocumented people live in fear because of Secure Communities and collaborations between police and ICE, and disputed the stereotype that undocumented people do not pay taxes, saying she and her parents prove that wrong every year. She added that undocumented communities include Asian people and people from all over the world, not only Latinos Immigration Reform Is Broken (2011).

Amnesty as a policy device

Zadek argued that amnesty is a legitimate public technique. He noted that when Prohibition was repealed by the 21st Amendment, people who had been felons a day earlier were no longer felons, and nobody demanded they still go to jail. He also noted that taxing authorities regularly offer amnesty programs to people who have misstated tax liability, waiving penalties and jail time in exchange for payment. He said declaring amnesty would let undocumented residents come out of hiding and participate fully in the system, yet proposing it is treated as outrageous Immigration Reform Is Broken (2011).

History of immigration law

In a 2016 episode, Alex Nowrasteh of the Cato Institute gave Zadek a history of U.S. immigration law. He said the first laws on the topic, in 1790, essentially regulated who could become a citizen and placed no restrictions on anyone coming here by race or country of origin. In 1875 Congress banned criminals and people who were insane and tried to target prostitutes, with the intent of excluding Chinese women. In 1882 Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, which banned Chinese immigrants from coming into the United States. Beginning in the late 1880s came laws against importing workers who could break up labor unions, and a Gentlemen’s Agreement between Japan and the United States to stop Japanese immigration. In 1917 a law banned illiterate immigrants and almost all immigrants from Africa and the rest of Asia. The 1921 Emergency Quota Act put numerical quotas on immigrants from Europe for the first time, discriminating against Eastern and Southern Europeans in favor of Northern and Western Europeans. That law was made more exclusive in 1924. Herbert Hoover created an executive action in 1929 that banned almost all immigrants from Europe for the rest of the Great Depression Alex Nowrasteh: How Prop. 187 Turned California Blue (2016).

Nowrasteh continued: after World War II came gradual liberalization. A guest worker visa program for Mexican farmworkers was created in 1942 and expanded in the early 1950s. The Immigration Act of 1952 removed many race-based features of the 1924 Act. A 1965 liberalization treated every immigrant from every country essentially the same. An Immigration Act in 1990 opened the door wider for high-skilled immigrants, especially Asians. In 1986 there was a Reagan amnesty for about three million Mexican illegal immigrants. Since 1990, Nowrasteh said, there has been more spending on enforcement at the border and in the interior, but no further liberalizations or increases in legal immigration Alex Nowrasteh: How Prop. 187 Turned California Blue (2016).

Zadek characterized the restrictive laws as driven mostly by xenophobia and racism rather than findings that restrictions furthered the country’s self-interest. Nowrasteh added that from 1880 to about 1930 was the most xenophobic period of American immigration law, and that it reflected an alliance between racists, labor unions and progressives Alex Nowrasteh: How Prop. 187 Turned California Blue (2016).

Economic effects

In a 2019 episode, Nowrasteh told Zadek that immigrants make up about 13.5% of the U.S. population and about 16% of the workforce, and boost GDP by somewhere around 12 to 15%. On wages, he cited Harvard economist George Borjas, whom he called probably the most skeptical economist of immigration’s benefits, finding that from 1990 to 2010 roughly 30 million immigrants lowered wages of native-born high school dropouts by about 1.7% but raised wages of every other group by about 1% overall. Economists Giovanni Peri and Gianmarco Ottaviano, he said, found immigrants raised wages of native-born Americans by about six-tenths of 1%. Nowrasteh called the 1.7% figure the worst finding in the academic literature, and said it is outweighed by benefits to other native-born Americans What Part of Illegal Immigration Are You Against? Alex Nowrasteh Returns (2019).

Birthright citizenship

A 2018 episode with Sheldon Gilbert of the National Constitution Center explored the history and legal foundations of birthright citizenship, tracing the concept from the original Constitution through Dred Scott v. Sandford and the 14th Amendment to modern debates over executive orders and the “subject to the jurisdiction” clause Revenge of the Pen and the Phone (2018).

Across episodes

The question of whether opponents of illegal immigration oppose the illegality or the immigration itself is pressed by Zadek in both the 2011 and 2019 episodes, and the 2016 episode supplies the historical backdrop for it; the 2021 episode shows Zadek modifying his own “let them all in” formulation. The episodes show no resolution of the question across the episodes.

Backlinks